21

US Laws are Free of Copyright Federal Works 17 USC 105 says: Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government, but the United States Government is not precluded from receiving and holding copyrights transferred to it by assignment, bequest, or otherwise. The phrase "work of the United States Government"...


7

You are correct that it is quite expensive to patent something in U.S. law. Under U.S. patent law, once an idea is publicly published, if no one else has a patent application for the same idea that is pending, the idea enters the public domain and no one can obtain a patent of that idea. The publication become "prior art" with respect to any future patent ...


6

Mary Shelley's Frankenstein is indeed public domain so you are free to use that character. However, a lot of what we think of as "Frankenstein" is not Mary Shelly, for example, the iconic Frankenstein look dates from the 1931 film which may still be under copyright. You can use elements that are public domain, you can't use elements that aren't.


5

There isn’t a legal restriction Which is to say they could show replica’s if they wanted to; they just don’t want to. This is fairly typical - art museums display art, not reproductions of art. They also tend to be interested in displaying the art they have, not telling the life story of the artist.


4

It doesn't work, just like transferring the copyright to a young person to make it last longer doesn't work. In places where the length of copyright depends on the death of someone, it always depends on the death of the author. You can transfer copyright, but you can't change who is the author. If I write a book, and some copyright law says the copyright ...


4

Under Swedish copyright law, a work such as a movie is protected for 70 years after the death of the "creator". It is unclear who the copyright holder is, but it has not been 70 years since the film was made. Unless it was explicitly "released into the public domain", it is still protected, so you can get sued.


4

Whether published or unpublished, they are still protected by copyright. (They are probably unpublished for copyright purposes, but in the US this makes little difference for any recently created work (that is anything after 2002). For older work see the Cornell chart.) They cannot be copied or distributed without permission, unless an exception to ...


4

So as per recent Supreme Court decision in Matal v. Tam, the phohibitation of the registration of trademarks that may "disparage" persons, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols was ruled Unconstititutional. At issue, Tam, the bassist and founder of an all Asian-American band that was named after a slur for Asians (the linked article contains the Band ...


3

You can take pictures of public buildings and use them in your game, if you want. You cannot copy pictures (of anything) taken by someone else without the copyright owner's permission, so you need Google's permission to copy their photographs. The public building exception is specifically about architectural works and does not include e.g. murals drawn on ...


3

The opera may be in the public domain, but unless the performance is from several decades ago, which I assume is not the case, the performance is not in the public domain. The video therefore has copyright protection of its own. The use to which you want to put the video does not sound like fair use to me, although as the other answer notes that's ...


2

You can certainly release any or all of your existing copyrights under a CC0 or similar license which allows anyone to treat them as essentially public domain works. You could publish a statement of intent to do the same with future works. But I don't think that such a statement would be binding on your future actions, nor that another person could rely on ...


2

According to CENDI, yes the US government is able to claim copyright on works internationally. The law in question which makes US government works public domain in the US (17 U.S. Code § 105) only does so within the confines of US copyright. Since copyright protection is on a per-country basis, there's no reason that the US government couldn't assert IP ...


2

Does that mean the work is in the public domain in Uruguay after 50 years? Yes.


2

The standard answer is, there is a concept of Fair Use under which one might legally copy stuff. But it is impossible to definitively determine whether a particular use would be found to constitute fair use. In lieu of permission, you can (1) take your chances or (2) hire an attorney to give you a detailed analysis based on the specifics of the case and then ...


2

What should I answer to person that ask about using PD (CC0) clipart as logo or if he can trademark it? “Consult your trademark lawyer.” You can also direct them to the trademark registrar in your country. Unless you are their trademark lawyer, but, if so, why would you be asking us? From your organization’s position, you release it under CC0 meaning ...


2

No. The dead are generally not considered legal persons. They have no rights, and cannot own property, make contracts, sue, and so on. Giving them copyright would make as much sense (legally) as giving your rights to Niagara Falls. (Even if you could give copyright to a dead poet, it wouldn't help. As gnasher points out, copyright usually runs for 70 years ...


1

I would recommend writing the author and requesting permission. There's likely not much anyone would do if you refused, but you could certainly lose access to the site, and it sounds like the site is helpful for you. From their TOU: Restrictions on Use of Content If you purchase Content from the Site (including receipt of free Content), you agree ...


1

If a country were to hypothetically set the length of time for a copyright to expire (and thus enter the public domain) to one second, does that make it legal to freely distribute any work of art produced in any other country at any time, within the borders of that country? If in your example you assume the country is not subject to any treaty obligations ...


1

The only elements of such a work that would be protected by copyright are the contemporary creative aspects. That would include (recently) added commentary, concordance or artwork. Presenting a work in a new file format does not constitute a creative addition, so there is no protection for the PDFness of a public domain work.


1

Putvi's answer is basically correct, but there are some points that should be further elaborated on. This is a flow chart that reduces a concept to a standard notation. Use of boxes, ellipses, diamonds, lines etc. a conventional way to express certain ideas, and the shapes themselves are ancient so not protected. The same is true of many mathematical ...


1

Yes. This is why it's commonly seen in many works. Van Gogh's estate does not recieve any monetary value from trademark, nor do the current owners of the orignal work. To answer a question in the comments, because the person who scanned the picture is using it as public domain, it's not necessary. I could, for example, copy word for word an unabridged ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible